What was once billed as a tool to uplift indie developers has become just another method of trampling the little guy. What happened to XBLA?
If someone had the time to read the article. It clearly states that Braid guy is getting screwed because he isn't making as much profit as he deserves for the game. Lots of his profits are lost through Microsoft. Big companies benfit but he didn't as much. I don't know what sony's policies are but he would atleast make some more money unless Microsoft bought his exclusive rights.
What's more upsetting was When they said that Community is going to create XBL games for each other and everything is going to be free. But then Microsoft decided to change its policy.
yep but really are you surprised?
It's upsetting that XBL's ideology was based on making tons of money from everything (see Valve TF2 updates on 360).
And this is why console manufacturers should put out free hobby SDKs, allow users to create their own games and share them online via a community portal. The portal could be ad supported or require a annual charge of something pathetically small like $10 or $20 a year to join. Creators could them share in the revenue based on the amount of activity they are generating. (Note - Idea works in theory, but probably wouldn't work at all in real time)
"unless Microsoft bought his exclusive rights." Jonathan Blow (the Braid guy) said that there is a possibility of Braid showing up on PSN. He wasn't hinting anything, just said that it's not out of the question.
Braid $15 Eden about 20 hours to finish Braid 4 hours yea XBL is a joke and the only reason you pay to play online is so MS can get the hooks in and start fukn you!
There's a reason why soo many developers are now switching to the PSN for their games. Why go through Microsoft's ridiculous royalties and size limitations? Hell, Microsoft even charges you a huge royalty for each additional DVD on retail games. WTF?
Yeah using DVD's is Microsoft fault anyway.
@SolidSnake93 Microsoft charges you additionally per DVD because they put there Xbox security architecture in all their DVD games.
It's so funny they crap security still gets by-passed on a regular basis lol. MS should stand for Making SH*T cause they have screwed up more than Hilary did.(BTW I like Hilary but we all know some of her lose was her fault).
ya ms security is a joke the 360 was hacked b4 it hit retail then charging for it rofl lets hope all the bad press makes em smarten up a bit XD
... are simply putting more coin in Microsoft's pocket, instead of his... that's all kinds of f***** up....
he's making more money than if they didn't publish it.
... and he'd make even more if they didn't take such a huge cut....
You know he was in the red even after the game was on sale for a week or so, right? So yeah, I guess you're right... but are you really implying that it was worth it for him? He'd be better off selling copies of his game on the street.
you know what else is in the red for a week after release? ALMOST EVERY THING EVER SOLD EVER.
I used to be a huge supporter of xbox live but within time I would rather support psn.
But its business. Business is motivated by profits. Business does not have a heart. Well, it's the usual Microsoft tactic. I really am not sure about how Sony deals with PSN games, so I can't comment or compare. I always thought that except for Big company games like Bionic Commando or 1942: Joint Strike, they buy the studios and fund the projects entirely. Just like what they did for Flow.
Sony made be a little better at it seeing as there Gaming Division has been around for like 13 years now.
Then why does Apple give their developers a 70% cut off of every app they sell? Why does Sony not impose size limitations or restrictions on what is possible on the PSN? Business can have a heart. Microsoft can't.
Brings more meaning to the term "Micro$oft" Shame on you Micro$oft, just a shame.
I think if Sony could just come up with a more indie friendly development platform for the PSN, we'd see more of these indie developers transitioning. Shame on MS. Why should XBLA development costs be higher than developing a retail DS title?
^ That's Microsofts Trademark alright.
Microsoft = Milking the cow until it's dry. I say these guys come on over to Sony, where they're treated like human beings and not mindless drones.
http://www.macdailynews.com... o o o O
Pretty funny the guy who made "Everyday Shooter" hasn't complained at all like John Blow has. Maybe Sony doesn't hound the hell out of you?
Thinking about the case of Johnathan Mak, I read an interview with him and a few other top indie developers on Gamasutra not that long ago; He seemed quite happy about everything...
I think that's just Sony's system. In general, only the best indie games end up on PSN, because Sony find the smaller developers and not only buy the publishing rights for the games (essentially stopping them from appearing on other platforms) but also assist in the development (be it Everyday Shooter, the Pixel Junk games or flOw).
It sounds messed up for MS to charge out of the A$$ for indie games and act like they support and want everyone to put their games on live arcade. If MS keeps this up then developers might just go over to Sony or even Nintendo to make a profit and this will make MS change their tune about how much they should charge for development.
And this is the thanks he gets.
This is an experience on why not to spend almost a fifth of a million dollars developing a game for a restricted market. The fact of the matter is he signed the contract. HE DID. Microsoft didn't go into his house and hold a gun to his head.
A ripoff is a ripoff. With or without a contract
you'd buy a $200,000 impreza and then whine about how much it costs? you don't have to buy it. QQ more.
Now I'll give you an example Ever heard of a Repo man? Basically what they do is take your possessions if you have a debt to pay. Here is the ripoff part, if you want to get your stuff back, you have to sign a waiver saying that you can't sue for any missing items. So the Repo men basically take anything they want and it's ok because of the waiver you were force to sign. That is very similar to what MS has been doing with xbox live So again, I repeat, a ripoff is a ripoff. Contract or not.
*sigh* Lazy One, look at this. He could EASILY make back a lot of the money that he spent. No joke. He even got close to breaking even from MS's ****ty deal within a week or so. If he releases the game on PC or PSN, then he makes a profit, N-O D-O-U-B-T. It's not his fault. It's MS's. I know you love MS and all, but come on! They're not bringers of greater things, they're thieves in 3 piece suits.
Another Exclusive Flop for the Xbox brand.
the game aint no flop, it's actually a spiffing good game but the guys being ripped off by microsoft
was a day one Live member...up until this year...not anymore... paying to play a game on live is silly, but of course you dont have to pay to buy content at high prices
how about how XBLA is screwing every guy better yet how XBL is screwing everyone
psn is the same way.If xbl was so bad people wouldn't dev for it.I agree the cert is a b1tch but its MS's platform and they make the rules sos they can charge or do what they please.The braid guy knew what he was getting himself into so he has to deal with it. Whats silly about paying to play on live? Its a service and you have to pay to play. No different from wow ,lineage, or any internet subscription.
I disagree. I had 5 full years of PC gaming for free, (before I moved over to consoles because It was impossible to keep up with graphics for cheap) and all of Valves games on PC allow gaming for free as did, many, many other good titles. I don't see why it should be different on consoles no matter how many bells and whistles are included. The fact is...I BUY A GAME and I expect to be able to PLAY IT with my friends who own the same console and said game. The worst of it is the fact that I can BUY a XBLA game, but I am not allowed to play the online part with my friends half the country away online ON THE GAME I BOUGHT unless I pay £35 a year even though I already bought that unused online content on the disc/download in the first place, hence buying content I don't use. Oh yeah, you say well, £35 is cheap for a year, but it isn't! and I don't see that I should pay so much for something I only use occasionally for a quick game, since all those years of the superior experience of online PC gaming. I didn't even agree with XBL on the XBOX; I see it charging you for the use of playing online with friends and is like charging for a game of 'Tig'. Also, most people have to pay for an land-line, a ISP connection such as my accommodation at uni as you said; then on top a fee so I can play MY GAMES, I BOUGHT, WITH ALL THE CONTENT ON THE DISC, INCLUDING THE MULTIPLAYER SECTION AND CONTENT with my friends. Those other games you talk about, MMORPGs; people pay for the experience and the full immersion of being in another world, a totally different experience altogether constantly being added onto in content and gameplay. I'm sorry, but that does not even compare to playing a quick online game every 3 days or so for 10 minutes with a friend, who owns the same console an internet connection and the same games...for £35 A YEAR. See what I'm getting at? Sorry, I'm on strictly on PSN on the PS3 for all online gaming, I'm never paying Live. I'm not stooping to that level of chucking money into the ocean for something that has previously been FREE (online gaming) for about 7 years mainstream no matter what little 'car windscreen furry dice features' it has extra to try to justify for that price. I bought my console, I bought the game, its nothing special, its online gaming, that should be it.
While I agree with you about buying a game and expecting that to be it, money-wise, I disagree with the rest of your comment. I've owned a 360 since it came out(I now have an elite) and Xbox Live has been great to me. I'm the type of gamer that likes to sign on random times during the day to get some online time in. I got my PS3 last year, and while I enjoy PSN, it's not the same. I feel connected to my friends on LIVE. Hopefully HOME will change this, but right now, I'm happy with what I get for 50 bucks a year. How are MMORPGs different? LIVE is an online interface, connects you to friends, it's always improving, content and gameplay are released, what's the difference? LIVE connects you to a multitude of games, not just one. That's the difference. You talk about how you just want to play every few days. You DO realize you can make a new LIVE username and get a month for free, right? If that doesn't interest you, and you would like to keep one username, there are countless FREE 48 hour codes scattered across the internet. Various forums have members who give these codes out on a regular basis. If you cannot find them, they come free with games(sometimes a whole month free), and are available on eBay for very cheap. That seems suited to what you were talking about(how much you play) because you can still get on Xbox LIVE without a gold membership and you can just update when you want to play your friends. Although it's not a typical approach to having a LIVE account, and entering codes can get bothersome, I feel it pays off in the end. I do agree that LIVE should offer more perks for being Gold, but it doesn't bother me to pay for a subscription. I'm usually very cheap when it comes to things like that. Somehow, I don't feel that way with LIVE. It'll only get better when the new dashboard update arrives(hopefully) because I feel it opens up the doorway for more online features. I'm actually more excited for HOME, but I just wish it would release. If Microsoft doesn't stop charging for online play, and HOME surpasses it, I'll play more games on my PS3. Until then...I'll stick with what I pay for.
I am happy with the results of Braid... and microsoft certification ensure the quality of the game was great... and this is the reason why this game turned out to be one of the top xbox live arcade games... this guy (braid developer) is pissed because he probably didn't get the best deal he could get... You do not see companies that know what they doing in terms of business and signing contracts b!tch!ng about xbox live arcade game ripoff... like Ninja bee... some of these people since they are amateurs would sign anything once they see their dream of actually publishing a game just to later b!tch about it when they see they could of get more money... if I am not mistaken this was the problem with N+ developer too... There are lots of developers that know how business works and have no problem with xbox live... also, I find it ironic that many anti-xbox 360 people are always talking about quantity over quality... and now you are b!tch!ng about the certification process... if microsoft is getting tougher as far as the quality of games that comes out on xbox live arcade is probably because of your moaning... now that the last few games have being great you are crying? If these developers can't handle it they have a few options: Make it for PSN and go broke.. because PSN sells can't match xbox live arcade hense why the limited developer support... or go XNA and you will have practically no certification process...
"Make it for PSN and go broke.. because PSN sells can't match xbox live arcade hense why the limited developer support..." Only currently. People forget about that; Things change.
Paying $15 a month to play for a few hours a night if even that worse than paying $4 a month for xbl period.If your argument is psn/ps3 is better than 360/live because psn is free than thats jus ta fanboy rant that cant be taken seriously because the only reason psn is free is to compete with live because if there was no live you better bet your ass that psn would be charging.Sony is losing millions a month on the servers. $4 a month is not alot of money you can recycle 80 side cans and pay for a month of live so all the psn fanboys have to stop that argument. If you can afford a ps3 you can afford 4 bucks. Your entitled to your opinion and I respect your opinion except for the fact that you think 4 bucks a month is a waste.because Im sure theres millions of people who had t owait for the ps3 or millions of people who had to pay a lil extra for a ps3 jus tso the ycould include wifi but will never use it or any of its features or had to shell out 600 bucks for the ps3 and its spes when at most maybe 3 are actually going to be used in its lifetime. See what Im getting at? Its just personal preference or fanboyism.Live is worth the 4 bucks a month and its no way a waste. Psn is nice and im sure it will get better in the future " I have a ps3 and a 360" and If live was $100 a year Id still pay for it. I too am a pc gamer and the only reason valve games " steam is free is because of the advertising steam uses for the servers. Also about the braid thing this guy mad e the game and signed the contracts and I'm sure he had lawyers sign the contracts so everything is on the up. You cant blame MS for doing what every other company would do and that's make money and have a product. Sony does it , nintendo does it , apple does it , steam does it. Its business, every company strives to be #1 , every game dev strives to have the best games, its business.Some times people get shortchanged because they suck at business.I work for a elevator company and this is done every day. I am a elevator mechanic in a hospital here in NYC and And to day I had to replace 2 pieces of steal in the elevator shaft , both pieces of steal and the labor probably cost my company about $600 bucks " labor & supplies " and they charged the hospital $15,000 . Its business!
People don't have money to waste.
There was no Live when the Dreamcast online was around... or the PC gaming for years before. Even the PS2 service didn't charge for online play. Keep trying to justify it, when it coems down to it, it's a pointless cost for very little.
I'm sorry, but I still don't see why Microsoft are able to charge people just for playing online. Years ago, I could play Serious Sam, Soldier of Fortune, Quake 3, Unreal Tournament (2003, 2k4 too) and yes, the Dreamcast service was totally free and so was the PS2 service. I'm not sure how Gamespy or those gaming services operated in the past, but I am not happy by Microsoft restricting the world to play online for a price on a console that insists that it brings the world together and encourages online communities...for a price Fact is; about 5 years ago, ALL online gaming on consoles and PC games were free. I will not stop, I will not join the crowd of those who think something that was once free deserves to be charged for or subscribed for a price because the current 'king of the consoles' thinks so. I don't even believe I am missing out on anything; because XBL does NOT impress me and 3/4 of the games are perfectly playable on PSN. Also, there is NOTHING wrong with PSN; I have got fed up with people mocking PSN. There is nothing SPECIFICALLY WRONG with PSN. It is a fully functional service that hits the spot that is free and serves its purpose perfectly. And, yes. You get what you pay for with XBL, but do you? DO YOU? What do I suggest MS do relating to the Live situation? Free weekends. That's right; I suggest free weekends of gaming and the allowance of using the online features of your purchased XBLA games and those who subscribe to 'Gold get all the same features, but they pay to use the service for those 5 working days whenever they want and possibly some relevant perks.
My theory is if online gaming is free on pc's (except mmo) then it should be free on consoles.
thats also what I think about extra game content too. If you can get free patches, maps, etc for PC games then it should be the same for consoles. I want to sue whoever came up with the bullshit "DLC" term where you have to pay to get extra content for a game you already BOUGHT
This ones sort of tricky. Some DLC should be free, but in complete honesty, you should pay for DLC that actually makes a difference or addition to the original game; like expansion packs in the past. So this one is debatable, but I think it should at least be 50mb as the lowest limit to allow DLC as some DLC just charges you for a few kilobytes of memory recently.
"Possibly", "probably"... Are there any facts in this article? I don't know, but there are definitely some false statements. "Microsoft's upcoming XBLA Community Games service seemed like a better alternative for developers with fewer restrictions and certification hurdles, but already that service is showing itself to be even more bogged down with lower royalty rates and absurdly low price caps designed to keep indie developers starving." Um, no (source: http://www.gamesindustry.bi... royalty rates are 70% with Microsoft being able to take 10-30% if they decide to market the game (which, who would've thought, gives the game a lot more exposure and thus more sales). Low price caps are not "designed to keep indie developers starving", but to protect us, gamers, from the onslaught of overpriced crap. Besides, up to 800 points for more ambitious games is not that low, only recently have we seen more XBLA games priced at 1200 points (and of course, gamers started complaining immediately). I'm not saying that the situation couldn't be much better, especially since I'm also looking into trying my luck with developing XNA games, but if it was really that bad, we wouldn't be seeing a steady influx of games from smaller developers on XBLA, and that's exactly what we are seeing.
More Microsoft bashing, you know its funny to me how everybody loves to bash on company for being........scurvy, or undermining, I seem to remember that Sony had game making tools available to the public.....that cost upwards to $2000! And for the (un)fortunate few who bought that tool set how many games came out?...... Ok lets keep this real, I mean absolutely 100, the 360 as far as hardware (quality) breaks a lot, and people rag MS about that, but nobody had anything to say when you were flipping psx over to get it to play games after a while......or when your ps2's stop reading stuff after about a year........hmmmmm wonder why? How many Walkmans have people owned here? Point is, EVERY company has the same scurvy @$$ Ways. if you think Nintendo wouldn't screw this guy over well...... check their history with the major developers from the 80's.......can you say monopolized? And Sony well...people love to say that MS loves to screw the less rich companies over and buy their exclusives instead of make them.....wow ok, cause Final Fantasy was a PlayStation since.....you know.....always.....oh except that time it was a Nintendo exclusive and EA and Sony showed up with A) a better medium CD > Cartidge, and B)MONEY. Please just stop this nonsense........every company on top gets there and stays there by doing this kind of stuff, its unfortunate yes but there is NO company.....none that hasn't pulled crap like this before, how many of you people wear Nike's? yea think about that sh*t. This MS hating is stupid, of course they are going to do shiesty things like take a percentage of this guys money, you thought they were going to let him put it out for free, come out of Candy Land and join the rest of us in reality, Sony would have screwed this guy over just as bad if not worse eventually.....hell Nintendo probably would not have even published the thing (Braid). I hope that things get better for it's creator, he truly is a genius, but at least he is getting a taste of hoiw the industry REALLY is no matter where you go.
This is a MS topic. We are bashing MS. You are basically saying "don't bash MS for its greedy strong hand tactics because sony and a bunch of other company are doing it also," which is poor reasoning. If MS changed, that would send a message to the others. Why can't everyone be like Valve? Those guys are awesome.
No, he does have a point. If we're going to b*tch about M$ using undermined tactics we might as well point out all the other companies too. And no, i'm not defending M$ or anything (I think paying for Live is a ripoff) i'm just backing up this guys point because he probably knows what he's talking about more then we do
Microsoft is new to this business. They fail to realise that these IPs as they call them were the ideas of passionate people who are not that different from musicians, and we know whats happened to the music industry.........
is going to seriously curtail any digital download services anyway. Comcast is going to have a 250 gig cap beginning in October. So much for playing games on xbox live.
Poor James Saliva. I hope Dishwasher doesn't get screwed by MS. Why does MS have to be so greedy?
Microsoft gets approved on this lousy site... you people can keep commenting against MS, but in the end they just get more and more succesful...the moderators of this site are PS3 fanboys, N4G is a PS3 site, and should be renamed News-for-Playstation(N4P) anything pro-xbox 360 = reported and flamed! anything pro-PS3 = hailed and loved... its obvious to everyone that this apparent "community" isn't really about the games anymore, instead its about the selfish ideals of the PS3 fanboys, who must justify their £600+ purchase...
have to justify your 800+ purchase.... (live fees, rip off peripherals etc.)
ehum, so you jmcorp thinks this is the way to "encourage" new talent in the field? Shouldnt matter if youre into ms, sony or nintendo... this just aint the right way to do it.
Forget Xbox live and just go wit the Wii ware, PSN, Ds, Psp, hell..even the cell phones. Choose one, any one =]
Faulty consoles (so people can buy multi.) Charge to play online and also charge late fee. (When everybody else is giving the same option for free) Extra charge for using extra disk. (they decided on the disk space why do developers have to pay for there mistake) Now doing this to indie developers. Whats the deal are they saving this money for world domination? Or maybe just exclusive DLC. Either way i hopes its for there next console. That they make it right risk free and future proof.
think about the developers who didn't have good sales.
Tbh why are they charging so much for this game? £8 I think it is for an Arcade game lol no thanks sure it may be an awesome game and yes I can afford it but I just don't think this game is worth it. Also MS say that indie devs who use XNA then sell games on Windows/xbox platform will be getting 70% of the profits which I think is pretty cool. I'm not totally sure if XBLA/PSN/Steam etc are screwing the little guy more than the costs of development involved in making a game, maybe that what I just said contradicted itself lol.
that's pretty sad